Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
kiss my grits
Joined
·
18,629 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Not meant to start another 2000 post thread on Kobe versus Tmac. I just thought these stats were interesting and wanted to share what I found.

Check this out:

Kobe born 8/23/78
Tmac born 5/24/79 (about 8 months younger)

Kobe's first season 96/97
Tmac's first season 97/98

Kobe career points: 8,197
Tmac's career points: 6,135

If you avg out Tmac's totals for the last two seasons to estimate his output next year, you get about 2000 points for the season.

Being 2/3 year younger and one season behind Kobe, Tmac's total if they had come in at the same time would be approx <b>8,135</b> to Kobe's <b>8,197</b>.

Not mention these stats:

Kobe's career rebounding total: 1,894
Tmac's career reb total (1 yr less): 2,225 (w/ avg yr about 2800)

Kobe's career assist total: 1,579
Tmac's career assist total: 1,226 (w/ 1 avg yr about 1600)

Kobe's career steals: 533
Tmac's career steals: 426 (w/ 1 avg yr about 530-540)

Kobe's career blocks: 253
Tmac's career blocks: 469 (w/ 1 avg year about 550-570)

Kobe career turnovers: 1,051
Tmac's career turnovers: 693 (w/ 1 avg year about 880-910)

Just found these stats interesting.
 

·
I want Waffles.
Joined
·
19,935 Posts
But u got to think T-Mac first couple of year he avg like 4points a game and he really didnt get a chance to play and Kobe did..
 

·
kiss my grits
Joined
·
18,629 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Actually I didn't post minutes payed, but Tmac played more his first year than Kobe, but Kobe played more the second year.

Their first 2 years avg out to be almost exactly same playing time.

It is amazing how almost dead-on most of their career stats are.
 

·
A!
Joined
·
9,434 Posts
Kobe's average minutes per game (first 2 years)- 20.8
T-Mac's average minutes per game (first 2 years)- 20.5

Now, you say "Well, they have had an equal opportunity to show what they can do as far as minutes played". However, this is interesting IMO.

Kobe's mpg in 3rd year- 37.9
T-Mac's mpg in 3rd year- 31.2

Kobe got more of a chance in his 3rd season. So not only is he 1 year ahead as far as years in the league. He is also ahead in the number of seasons in which he was allowed to be a big-time contributor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
McGrady's stats are a bit inflated now. If he had a good 2nd scoring option and good rebounders, his numbers would dip a bit. It's no wonder he has back problems. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
I dont know if tmac #'s will drop because he is still the 1st scoring option he might jus get a couple more open looks with hill on the court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,236 Posts
Originally posted by <b>couchtomato</b>!
I think it's great to have two such talented guys competing at the same time. Should be a fun next 10 years!
I agree - it makes it more fun to have 2 talented kids at the same position and at the same time and they are also very good friends off the court, which is another interesting aspect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
I think you guys are getting too caught up with McGrady's numbers. T-Mac only gets the numbers he does because he is the only scorer on his team, just like Iverson. If you dig deep into McGrady's numbers, he actually averaged about 24.8 ppg, 6.7 rpg, and 5 apg when Grant Hill was on the floor. These numbers are almost identical (minus the rebounding, which McGrady is definitely better at) to Kobe's. Then, you factor in that Shaq got much bigger numbers than Grant Hill. So, you can't tell me that having a second scorer actually helps Kobe's or McGrady's numbers, though it does help them win. If Kobe was on the Lakers without Shaq, he would get numbers that were as good if no tbetter than McGrady's, and would probably lead the lakers to at least the first round of the playoffs (which is what McGrady does with the Magic in the EAST). I am obviously a bigger Kobe fan than T-Mac fan, but I am willing to admit that these to guys are very similar in skill. I would still take Kobe over T-Mac because of his clutch shooting and how he actually plays with heart. This is unless I really needed a guy that could play both the 2 and 3 spots and could be one of my team's leading rebounders, which would give McGrady the nod.
 

·
kiss my grits
Joined
·
18,629 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
because of his clutch shooting and how he actually plays with heart.
I agree with you mostly. The point of the comparison is to show that McGrady is about on par and maybe ahead of Kobe as far as points in their careers.

As far as the above quote, again, I don't understand how people can question a person's heart. Especially a guy that carried a weak team to the playoffs and played exceptionally well in the playoffs even though he could barely walk in between games.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,327 Posts
This whole thread is stupid

Statistics mean basically nothing. Karl Malone has a chance to own the record for career points scored in a few years, does that mean he's the best scorer? Obviously not. Stats are misleading, at best. There is absolutely NO WAY you can tell what these two players would do if you put them in eachother's shoes. Yeah, Tracy's stats are a bit better, but they are both great players.

They are similar in a lot of ways, but they are also very different, which is probably a product of the systems they play for. Tracy is the man in Orlando, the sole scoring option, so obviously he's going to be a bit better 1 on 1, and a bit more of a scorer. But Kobe has always had to share the spotlight with Shaq in LA. The system he's in now requires him to pass the ball more than Tracy does, and it's a more team oriented offense. So his game is a bit different than Tracy's.

It's obvious that these are two great players, why can't it just be left at that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,527 Posts
ultimately, this rivalry (hopefully it turns into one) will not be determined by a statsheet, or who scores more points. like all great rivalries, it'll be determined on the floor, head to head (hopefully again). who's going to outplay who?

at this point, mcgrady's career is slightly behind kobe's pace thus far, simply because kobe had an opportunity to showcase his skills on the biggest stage, and has risen to the task. when there careers are done, kobe's championships and his performance in helping win them will certainly be in his favor, regardless of what some think of his importance there. there's a long way to go to change things, and it certainly won't be as important if mcgrady's dominating the league in years to come. it'll be interesting, and we certainly can't discount many other stars around the league as well, who could throw many wrenches into this rivalry ever really taking off.
 

·
kiss my grits
Joined
·
18,629 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
moTIGS:

To say stats mean absolutely nothing is ludicrous. Karl Malone probably will own the all-time scoring record, and what will that say about him.. well, he will probably be dabted as arguably the best PF of all-time, or at least the best scoring PF of all-time, including being considered one of the most durable, reliable, and consistent players of all-time.

I would argue that yes, Tracy is Orlando's <b>main</b> scoring option, but he was not their "only" scoring option. A team that avg'd the 4th best ppg in the NBA and Tmac was not scoring 80 ppg. Besides Shaq, who is considered a "scorer" on the Lakers? Almost nobody. On Orlando, many of Tmac's counterparts are strictly scorers.

And you say that Kobe in his system is made to pass the ball more, but wouldn't that lead you to believe he would have higher assists since all McGrady does is score? But he doesnt.

There is nothing else at this point to talk about in the NBA. And this is the first time that anyone has really ever argued this with real stats behind the argument. If you don't wanna read anymore about Tmac and Kobe, then dont read the thread.

kflo:

This will never be decided head to head. At least not for quite some time. Unless Orlando and LA were to matchup in the playoffs, and LA without Shaq, it would never be about Kobe vs Tmac.. as long as Shaq is around, it is his team. Not to mention it seems these days coaches won't put marquee players on each other until the end of games to avoid foul trouble.

You are right about not discounting other players.. Paul Pierce has a shot at being in this discussion if he keeps his pace up. If KG ever turns it up a notch, he could be as well. If Lebron James lives up to his hype, he is another.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
58,359 Posts
this never ending argument may change this year. If Hill is 100% and Tracys stats go down. Will the discussion still be the same?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,268 Posts
Fellas...The whole point of team sports is that it is situational. Kobe is in a situation that makes him better than T-Mac. Dont get me wrong I love T-mac and I despise Kobe, but thats just opinion. Whenit comes down to it the hall of fame judges you by rings and then by stats.
Why do you think players like Charles Barkley shop themselves around at the end of thier careers trying to get that ring?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,527 Posts
i agree that stats do mean something. they definitely support a players greatness. great players usually have the stats to back them up. but there's that extra something that separates the true greats. hakeem and robinson's stats were pretty comparable in their heydays. but hakeem just had that extra level robinson didn't have. it's not really something that was there in the stats.

on assists, jordan's assists went down with his scoring as his team got better. the more he was asked to share the ball, the more it affected his stats overall. but he too always had that extra level that the stats didn't necessarily show (although he was always leading the league in scoring).

as for head to head, we'll see. i do think that regardless of the surrounding circumstances, you tend to see alot in head-to-head matchups. it's guys on the court making plays. you can lose and still be making plays to give your team a chance. the player with the weaker team is at a bit of a disadvantage, although, like iverson in '01, he's got the opportunity to go down shooting.
 

·
kiss my grits
Joined
·
18,629 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Well, everyone is gonna hate me for constantly disagreeing, but that is what a discussion board is about..

Anyways, you can't possibly say stats aren't a driving force for hall of fame consideration and votes.

Do you envision Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, John Stockton, Karl Malone, Reggie Miller having a tough time getting into the Hall? 0 rings there.

Horace Grant has got a lot of rings, but I don't think he'll be a HOF'er.

Like you said, it is all situational.. Kobe is in a better situation to get himself rings, but that doesn't make him the better player. Just like Horace and Karl Malone. Who is the better PF? Obviously Malone. But Malone has never been in the situation to get himself a ring or two. Grant has. Doesnt make Grant better.
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top